Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Robert Knowlton
Mike Miller
Brett Gordon
Team 2D
Executive Summary
Our design team was presented with the task of creating an attachment to an everyday faucet that
would create electric power by propelling a turbine. With the given customer input and our
findings during our external search, our team came up with several initial design ideas that were
introduced to the group. After critiquing these designs and scoring them against weighted
criteria, we chose the best one which contained a horizontal turbine and motor which would
power a digital clock that is attached to the housing. The clock will be built into the housing and
self contained from the water. With this system design concept selected, we then proceeded to
perform feasibility calculations and economic analysis tests to see if this design would be
possible. With our findings, this design concept is not only possibly, but it is also profitable.
Table of Contents
2
1. Introduction
1.1 Problem Statement
The problem that was presented to us is to develop and economically viable prototype of a hydro
powered system that can be attached to a home faucet. This hydro powered system will produce
electrical energy from the flowing water that can be used to power up an accessory attached to
the system. The accessory will be a digital clock that is built into the housing unit. The energy
produced by the turbine will be more than able to power this clock. Along with developing a
prototype of these items, the prototype itself must be inexpensive, easy to use, attractive, and
efficient. With all of these factors to consider, our group plans to build a working prototype that
overcomes all of these barriers.
1.2 Background
Group 2D runs a company that specialized in water turbines for micro-hydro power systems for
residential homes, farmers, and ranchers. Our company looks toward the future when it comes to
energy supplies by using renewable resources such as water to power our systems. Alternative
forms of energy and power are currently gaining popularity in our county. Using renewable
hydroelectric power is one such alternative source. The target market that will become our
biggest consumers will be homeowners that live in the city or suburbs and rural farmers and
ranchers who live far from power lines and would like to produce their own power supply. This
market will buy into the product because it will allow them to power a clock without outside
energy.
Transparent
Compatible
Generation
Corrosion
Industrial
Resistant
Efficient
Housing
Vertical
threads
Control
Water
Design
Power
length
Total
Cost
Customer Needs
High Performance x x x
Low Cost x x x
Aesthetically Pleasing x
Easy Attachment x x x
Vertical Discharge x x
Small Size x x
Self Contained x x x
Reliable/Endurance x x
Process Visualization x
Material Material
Units Watts % $ N/A Gage in. in3/s
Selection Selection
Figure 2: QFD
3. Concept Development
3.1 External Search
The external search revealed a similar concept: the Sylvania ECOlight. This product attaches to a
shower head and powers a LED light [ref 1]. The ECOlight allows water to pass through a
turbine which will rotate a generator and power the LED light. The product also has water
4
temperature indicator lights which will appear blue if the water is cold or red if the water is hot.
This product is relatively small; measuring about 24 cubic inches.
A faucet generator patent was also discovered. US Patent number 7608936 was issued October
27, 2009 [ref 2]. This faucet generator is completely self contained and vertical. In the issued
patent, many designs were shown, and a turbine design was included. The turbine design had
rotor vanes that aimed the water perpendicular to the turbine blades. The patent did not specify
an added feature in its claims or how much power would be produced. Also, the patent did not
specify how or where the device would attach to the faucet.
Patent number 6210113 was issued April 3, 2001 for a water wheel turbine for pumping stations
[ref 3]. This patent is design for larger scales but the concept can still be used for small scale
applications. The design allows the flow of water to rotate the turbine and generate power. The
water flows into buckets which are closed by a spray of water. The buckets are then opened at
the bottom of the wheel by the force of the water.
At the start of the project, a turbo machinery chapter on hydraulic turbines was provided [ref 4].
The chapter introduced three basic turbine designs which are the Pelton, Francis, and Kaplan
turbines. The Pelton design is very similar to water wheels. The turbine design had cup shaped
blades that would collect the energy. The shaft would be completely horizontal so the design
would be used on rivers or streams. The Francis turbine design has curved blades that collect the
force of the water. This design has a flat bottom with blades that extrude up. This design is very
similar to the ECOlight turbine design. The Kaplan turbine design is very similar to boat
propeller. This design is thickest at the top of the turbine, where the impact force of the water
would be the greatest.
The team learned that there were many turbine designs to choose from. There is no single turbine
design that can be used in every application. Also, with the design patents that have already been
issued, the team may have trouble patenting our design since the overall concept of generating
power from running water does not change. New claims would need to be developed so that we
could receive our own patent.
5
the turbine blades. The team could also choose not to use a nozzle and position the turbine
directly under the inlet.
To solve the turbine sub problem, the team looked into the Pelton, Francis, and Kaplan turbine
designs discussed in the external search section above. In addition to these three designs the team
could design a basic water wheel. Each design had its advantages and disadvantages but the
designs are still able to convert kinetic energy into rotational energy.
The team came up with different combinations of gears or pulleys to transmit the energy from
the turbine to the generator. Gears or pulleys would be used to increase generator rotational
speed to its optimum efficiency. Some considerations for gears were bevel, helical, spur and
worm gears. The type of gear to be used will depend on what is available and the placement of
the generator.
The second attachment design is a soap dispenser that would Figure 3: Clock design
only dispense soap when the customer pressed a button. The
soap would be stored below the generator in a tank. This tank would store about the same
amount of soap as a small bottle of liquid soap. This design would require a small pump to
dispense the soap that may require more power that can be supplied.
6
a nozzle would be attached to the pipe to direct the flow towards the turbine blades. The water
would discharge under the turbine and out the pipe at the bottom. Gears would be attached to the
top side of the turbine housing and connect to the generator. The generator would be placed
vertically due to its small size and connect to the attachment. This design is provided below in
Figure 5.
The final design is called the ‘gears below’ design and featured a Francis or Kaplan turbine. The
inlet would have a nozzle that directed the flow but does not bend. Similar to the second design
concept, the water would discharge out the pipe which was located under the turbine. This design
also placed the gears beneath the turbine housing and the generator would be placed on side of
the turbine housing. This design was the most compacted design of the three design concepts.
The ‘gears below design’ is featured in Figure 6.
7
The Pelton design received the highest score because the energy generation process would be
seen in its entirety. This design was also larger than the other two concept designs so this design
received a lower score, but it would not prevent the downward water discharge as much and the
other two designs. This design was thought to be as reliable as the ‘gears above’ design and more
reliable than the ‘gears below’ design because very few parts would be exposed to water. Since
the generator was above the turbine and behind the gear, there would be a smaller chance that
water would reach the generator and damage it.
The Francis turbine design was the best design generated by the team. It would require less
redirection of flow and could be positioned vertically. The design would allow gravity and
pressure to be the driving forces of the design. The design would also satisfy our size restrictions
and our power generation requirements.
Due to the size constraints, the design would need to use gears over a pulley system. Gears are
better used when the distance between the shafts are relatively small. Also, a pulley system
would require belts that are subject to more wear and tear than gears.
The attachments were not rated against a few of the customer needs because the needs were not
relevant to the attachment designs. The team chose the clock over the soap dispenser for many
reasons. The clock is smaller and would require less power to operate. The clock would also
require less consumer maintenance over time.
For the housing of the turbine, the outer diameter is 2.8” with a 1” width. A .75” inlet nozzle
enters a .2” diameter inlet hole of the housing to power the turbine. The water then flows to the
bottom where it exits through a .375” diameter outlet into the sink. Attached to the turbine
housing is additional space for the gears and motor. The additional housing is 2.8” tall, 3” thick,
and 4” long. This would make the height of the entire housing complex 4” tall and 4.5” wide.
These specifications will allow this product to fit comfortable onto an average sink faucet
without getting in the way of normal day-to-day activities.
8
4.2 Feasibility Calculations
Before testing can begin, the feasibility of producing the power required must be calculated. The
feasibility calculations can be found in appendix E. Based off of the given assumptions, we
found the following. To find rotational inertia, the mass and radius of the turbine were estimated
to be .1 kg and .0254 meters, respectively. Meanwhile, the gear ratio, to help maximize
efficiency, was determined to be about 10. This will produce .73 Watts. Finally, the diameter of
the nozzle was determined to be 0.005 meters for an increased output velocity.
5. Detailed Design
5.1 System Performance Predictions
The team believes that the design will convert 30% of the total kinetic energy of the water into
rotational energy in the turbine. With a gear ratio of 5.6, the team believes that the rotational
speed of the generator will be approximately 26600 rpm. The generator will then create .68 W of
useful power and operate at an efficiency of 5% with a 10 ohm resistor attached to the system.
The resulting current and voltage across the resistor will be .26 A and 2.6 V respectfully. A
detailed outline of our predictions can be found in appendix F.
9
order to contain the turbine and prevent water from disrupting the motor. Appendix G contains
the designed parts as well as the assembly view. The Bill of Materials for all of these
components can be found in appendix H.
6. Conclusion
Team 2D believes that this design fulfills the consumer needs extremely well. The design is
small and its process is visible from many angles. Also, the design will be easy to attach to
existing faucets and discharge the water downward. The device will also be reliable and self
contained so that the product will last a couple years. This product will have high performance
and its retail price will be around $45. The design will be assembled with quality parts and
assembled quickly. Testing will need to be completed in order to optimize the systems
performance. Although there are existing patents for the faucet generator, the team believes that
it will not infringe on any of the patents because the design is not similar to the existing patents.
Overall, this design concept is not only feasibly; it is also economically marketable. If the team
continues with the production of this design, the company stands to make a substantial profit
with the production of this model.
10
Appendix A: References
[1] "ECOLIGHT." Oshram Sylvania. Sylvania, 2009. Web. 25 Mar 2010.
<http://assets.sylvania.com/assets/documents/Eco%20Light%20LUMI064R1.21f94898-
8b21-4bac-9475-c329a9b0bec0.pdf>.
[2] Shimizu, Takeshi. "US Patent 7608936 - Faucet Generator." Patent Storm. Patent Storm, 27
Oct 2009. Web. 27 Mar 2010. <http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/pdfs/
patent_id/7608936.html>.
[3] Ihrenberger, Adolf. " US Patent 6210113." Patent Storm. Patent Storm, 03 Apr 2001. Web. 8
Apr 2010. <http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/pdfs/patent_id/6210113.html>.
11
Appendix B: Project Management
Bob Knowlton – Team Leader, Turbine Designer, Writer, Manufacturer
Mike Miller – Housing Designer, Writer, Manufacturer
Brett Gordon – Writer, Design Sketcher, Manufacturer
12
Appendix C: AHP
13
Appendix D: Concept Selection Matrix
14
Appendix E: Feasibility Calculations
15
Appendix F: Performance Calculations
16
Appendix G: Parts and Assembly
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Appendix H: Bill of Materials
BILL OF MATERIALS
ITEM
# PART NAME PRICE QUANTITY COST
1 1/8" STEEL SHAFT $2.49 100,000 $249,000.00
2 56 TOOTH PLASTIC GEAR $1.11 100,000 $111,000.00
3 10 TOOTH PLASTIC GEAR $1.02 100,000 $102,000.00
4 RF-370CA-15370 MOTOR $4.25 100,000 $425,000.00
5 3/8"-18 NPS INTERNAL PIPE THREAD NOZZLE $1.52 100,000 $152,000.00
6 3/8"-18 NPS EXTERNAL PIPE THREAD NOZZLE $1.44 100,000 $144,000.00
7 TURBINE $10.00 100,000 $1,000,000.00
8 TURBINE HOUSING $4.69 100,000 $469,000.00
9 GEAR HOUSING $5.04 100,000 $504,000.00
10 VOLTAGE ADAPTER $2.71 100,000 $271,000.00
11 DIGITAL CLOCK $2.12 100,000 $212,000.00
12 ASSORTED WIRES (3 COLORS/20' PER COLOR) $3.00 10,000 $30,000.00
24